Court File and Parties

COURT FILE NO.: CV-412-16ES DATE: 2024-09-26 SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE – ONTARIO

RE: Estate of Sarah Margaret Ross, deceased

BETWEEN: James H. Ross, J. Grafton Ross and S. Graeme Ross, Applicants AND: J. Gordon Ross, Respondent

BEFORE: Mr Justice Ramsay

COUNSEL: Mark A. Radulescu for the applicants; J. Gordon Ross, self-represented

HEARD: September 26, 2024 at Kitchener by videoconference

Endorsement

Endorsement

1This is a sentencing hearing on a charge of contempt of court. On January 3, 2019 Broad J. convicted the respondent contempt of Harper J.’s order of November 1, 2018. The order required the respondent to answer questions and fulfil undertakings with respect to the administration of his mother’s estate. Sentencing was adjourned to await the appeal from the order of January 25, 2019 finding him in contempt of Taylor J.’s order to pass his accounts as attorney for his aunt.

2The appeal was disposed of on September 16, 2019 [Ross v. Ross, 2019 ONCA 724]. After delays caused by COVID and weather the matter came on for sentence before Broad J. who, on February 1, 2024, ordered a timetable and, since the finding of guilt was unopposed, ruled that he was not seised. Accordingly the matter came before me.

3The respondent has filed no new material. He is a lawyer.

4The key disclosure ordered concerns three mortgages given by his mother, whether he was acting for both her and the mortgagor and whether any advances were made. The respondent made no relevant submissions in oral argument. He said that his files are generally available. They are not available to the applicants, so the fact that they are “generally” available is of no use. He also reiterated his argument for an adjournment, which I denied at the outset of the hearing for oral reasons recorded.

5It has been five years. Unlike the case with his aunt’s estate, it cannot be said that the non-compliance arose from “a failure to understand and appreciate or to ignore the need for, and importance of, complying with the order within the specified time or with any reasonable time.” After five years the respondent’s non-compliance amounts to a callous disregard for the court’s authority.

6I do not think that house arrest would be appropriate. The respondent is living in his mother’s home, which is the property of the estate. Also he cannot be trusted to comply with court orders. Finally, house arrest would not be sufficient to coerce compliance.

7A past gaol sentence was successful: the respondent purged his contempt of Taylor J.’s order on the eve of his appeal.

8The principles of sentence in cases of civil contempt are set out in Business Development Bank of Canada v. Cavalon Inc., 2017 ONCA 663.

9It seems to me that I ought to consider that a short gaol sentence would deter a man in his 70s. On the other hand this is a serious breach that merits punishment to vindicate the dignity of the court, and an order to prevent the respondent from continuing to thumb his nose at the applicants.

10I order:

Orders

Orders

a. The respondent is sentenced to 5 days in gaol. b. The respondent is ordered to pay a fine of $5,000 to the Minister of Finance of the province. c. The respondent is ordered to take no further steps in the Application until he has complied with the order of Harper J. dated November 1, 2018. d. The respondent is ordered to pay substantial indemnity for costs to the applicants in the amount of $14,925 forthwith.

11Mr Radulescu may take out an order in these terms without the approval of the respondent.

J.A. Ramsay J.